September 11, 2012

It's a nice achievement for the Obama administration... except that the man — Ali al-Shihri — could have been in detention all these years, instead of contributing to terrorism. Exactly when was he released? WaPo says:

Shihri was captured in Afghanistan in December 2001 and spent nearly six years as a prisoner at Guantanamo. He was released to the custody of the Saudi government as part of a rehabilitation program for militants. In 2008, however, he decamped for Yemen and helped to revive al-Qaeda’s organization there.

The Saudi was among the last survivors of al-Qaeda's pre-September 11 generation. Shihri trained in a camp in Afghanistan under bin Laden's guidance as early as 2000, before fleeing the US onslaught that followed the terrorist attacks on New York and Washington.

He was arrested while trying to cross the border into Pakistan in December 2001. After two months in Pakistani custody, Shihri was handed over to the US and consigned to a prison cell in Guantánamo Bay for six years.

When the Bush administration tried to reduce the number of inmates inside this bitterly controversial detention centre, Shihri was released in 2007 and sent back to his home country, Saudi Arabia.

Here, the authorities placed him on a course designed to rehabilitate even the most hardened al-Qaeda operatives. The kingdom has trumpeted the alleged success of this scheme, which often allowed its beneficiaries to walk free if they recanted.

Shihri appears to have been released in 2009, whereupon he immediately crossed into neighbouring Yemen and joined AQAP, rising to occupy its second highest position.

This is an example of why the legal system has enfeebled our war effort.On this Bush effed up. He should have stated these clowns were illegal combatants, outside of the Geneva Convention and simply should have interrogated him and then shot him.

And yet I heard on more than one occasion from acquaintances and neighbors in social situations no less that they were sure that the Guantanomo detainees were innocent. This of course was when W was in office.

Too bad the current adminstration doesn't have someplace like Gitmo anymore. You know, so we could capture these terrorist a$$holes and squeeze them for what they know. Based on the article, he knew a lot.

our policy appears to be to kill them one at a time, rather than capturing them and getting useful, Intel so we can kill them in bunches

You can't really keep people locked up forever because of what they might do. If anyone is going to be let go, some of the wrong people are going to be let go.

The stupid involved with Guantanamo politics is that it was all bad choices, one way or another, and some people wanted to act like they were the saints.

Obama was one of those. He was going to close Guantanamo! Yay! And he got to be president and found out that closing Guantanamo actually involved deciding what to do instead. Boo-hoo. Sad Obama. Never mind that any marginally functional person who gave it a thought or two past the politics of it would have realized it was more complicated than that.

If you're thinking in terms of "fault." The pressure to get people out of Guantanamo was intense. The only way to be certain that people were not returned to lead the fight was to keep them there. Was moving people out of Guantanamo wrong? I don't know that it was wrong. But if someone is going to blame Bush, then they'd be better off checking themselves and their hypocrisy.

"BTW, torture is illegal (regardless of which party allows it) and it doesn't work as claimed...

It just good for payback..."

Water-boarding, at least, seems to have produced a great deal of accurate, actionable, intelligence. Stuff that could be checked, followed up upon, and proven to be legitimate. That doesn't make it right or wrong, it just means that "never works" is a lie.

AlieOpp. You do remember, do you not, the daily fucking screeching from the left about the horrors of Gitmo and the constant calls to release those members of the religion of peace who had not been given hearings, much less fair trials, much less read their rights? You don't remember any of that do you? And now we have a president who kills American citizens from drones a world away and we hear crickets from the peace loving left. You have no shame.

Can't be too hard on the President, though. He's still trying to figure out the iphone. Pretty soon, he'll be able to figure out Windows XP. OK, so that might take some more time. Not like we elected him to be smart or anything.

Dont you mother fuckers remember Gitmo referred to as a "gulag"? The US prestige will never recover... The US compared to the Soviet Union... bla bla bla.

The terrorist were going to be tried by the laws of war the same way its been done for hundreds of years.

But NOOOO. Trials were not good enough for Bush haters.... who (damned amnesics) tried to bring the 911 mastermind for trail here to lower Manhattan... until New Yorkers found out and Obama and Holder had to backtrack... and he still sits in where?

AllieOpp. Then you dont think American citizens are due a fair trial? You think they can be arbitrarily picked off and killed in total contravention of our laws? Because of intelligence gathered by the people who gave us weapons of mass destruction. You are confused, and over your head.

American citizens who live in terrorist camps and hideouts, who plot with foreign terrorist to kill Americans. Immoral to kill instantly but not torture? Height of hypocrisy.

---Such a liar, you are.

You're the hypocrite here.

The people in Gitmo were not tortured. It did not fit any definition of torture under the law. If Obama could convict Bush of torture, he'd have no problem taking it to trial. But no loaw would support him.

Allie, whatever you personally believe about the propriety of keeping and killing terrorists, the people you vote with, people like Andy and machine, compared America with the Soviet Union and Nazi Germany right up until their own guy started doing the exact same thing when he got into office.

Obama is doing those things, not because he's evil, but because he found out the situation was lot more complicated than he thought back when he a was a state senator. Andy and machine don't care--they're just blue monkeys flinging feces at the red monkeys. But they are using this high-flown moral language to do so.

And criticizing Bush, and Bush's supporters, for Bush doing something they used to say he was war criminal for not doing.

Whore, where have I argued that capture and trail by military tribunal= barbaric? Hatred of free speech or hatred of hate speech that YOU engage in when it comes to black Americans, not surprising coming from a white supremacist such as yourself. Take a look at this guy's website.

Why are you making shit up, that usually happens when you have no good argument.

American citizens who live in terrorist camps and hideouts, who plot with foreign terrorist to kill Americans. Immoral to kill instantly but not torture? Height of hypocrisy.

Oh c'mon, Allie. In 2008 we heard all about how GWB's military tribunals were a huge affront to Democracy, the rule of law, and would make the US lose friends and influence the world over. Lots and lots of shrieking about GTMO, waterboarding and fierce moral urgency to remove this stain from America's hands.

The Pres. orders people killed, and the left is nothing but a bunch of apologists.

Amazing that when Obama fixed a mistake made by Bush all you conservatives do is criticize. It's Obama derangement syndrome.

Allie who ran on a campaign promise to close Gitmo? Why do you think Obama ran on closing Gitmo?The clamor to close it was because it was being painted as another.. what was the name of the prison in Iraq? Abugraib? and Obama w/o thinking of the ramifications ran on it because it was popular and even the UN wanted to intervene.

This is the result of the politicisation of National Security.

This is fucking war we are talking about... the result of the killing of hundres of Americans.. this is not a one upmanship game!

I give Mr Obama credit for little--but his targeted killings are precisely the response to AQ. Yes--you kill the primary target, and if their families and associates end up dead, bad luck. Its collateral damage. And, of course, the killings are extrajudicial--big fucking deal. The bad guys end up dead, and thats the bottom line.

And how many hundreds of thousands or millions of our tax dollars did that missile and its delivery system cost after spending how many hundreds of thousands of tax dollars rehabilitating him? I'm the one threatened with prison if I refuse to pay the taxes and work the hours, days, years to pay for all that? Who are the ones enslaved here?

BTW, I was never in favor of closing GTMO. I voted for Obama, that didn't mean I agreed with every single one of his stances. What is wrong with keeping them incarcerated and giving them trail by military tribunal at GTMO, AS WELL as hunting them down and killing them when possible?

Synova said... "So even though republicans let him go, it's the Democrats' fault...

Nice bubble you got here..."

If you're thinking in terms of "fault." The pressure to get people out of Guantanamo was intense.

This is why you can't compromise with the left. Ever. It doesn't matter to them that the side of the compromise they support is the piece that triggered the problem. They only care that they can blame. We constantly hear about Bush running up spending. But Bush's compassionate conservatism model was an attempt to compromise with Democrats. Instead of working together the left simply blames the failures of their preferences on Republicans.

The Tea Party is a much preferred alternative. Maybe they'll get lucky and find a few less venal Democrats they can work with.

This is the problem with the left. Leftists tend to like the concept of morality and principles, but they don't hold them or know how to apply them. If Obama does something bad, they don't know how to say "that's bad". It's a moral compass failure.

Rightists tend toward the opposite problem: they tend to apply moral compasses even when they're inappropriate. Marriage is a union between a man and a woman, so gay marriage is bad! That's not a failure, but a stuck compass. They don't understand the underlying principles.

machine said... A cite to an article by a civil liberties attorney if proof that it works?

How about "(a) former senior interrogator in Iraq says that abusing prisoners results in unreliable information, costs American lives, and it still hasn't (sic)turned up Bin Laden."

I believe the actual interrogators...and John Wayne would never torture a prisoner...

9/11/12 9:10 AM

Rebutted by other interrogators who said they did get valuable information. This what happens when lawyers get in to the warefare business. Simple interrogation followed by summary execution is the only way to go. As for US citizens, if they make war on the US outside the borders of the US, fuck 'em. Shoot them on sight or upon capture.

--bitch, please. You're one of those cunts who'dve claimed that everyone who voted for Obama was in favor of Obamacare, because it was part of his platform, therefore the country was in favor of it.

Judging you by your own rules hurts, doesn't it, bitch?

What is wrong with keeping them incarcerated and giving them trail by military tribunal at GTMO, AS WELL as hunting them down and killing them when possible?

---lol. The lies and contradictions of the left. So do you want a trial or just assassination, slut? If you want due process, you can't argue that due process doesn't matter when its "possible" to just kill them right away.

Once you can capture them, its "possible" to immediately kill them. So either claim you're in favor of killing them right away and don't give a white about trying them, or admit you think waterboarding is ok.

Its interesting that by painting Bush as a barbarian for holding these people for trial by military commissions... the alternative... execution w/o a trial is now seen as de rigour. // Obama got it wrong.. but the record does not reflect that.

The painting of Bush as barbarian was a specialty of our MSM. That well-oiled painting machinery has gone all rusty now that Obama's the Prez.

The record on executions w/o trial is what it is, though that concept is still Obama's own original picture of terrorism as a civil crime.

3. 12 years of leftists like this whore calling Bush/Cheney a war criminal/hitler, nary a peep from the left to stop the leftists from saying it or castigating them. And you want ME to start playing by the rules THEY aren't?

Shove the civility up your ass. The left are barely human. Treating them as human only allows them to run rings around you.

Playing by civility rules with the left beclowns you.

Remember: John Kerry wrote on the Daily Kos. Al Sharpton and Ed Schultz have their own shows on MSNBC.

I distinctly recall much wailing and gnashing of teeth on the Democrat side of the aisle when the likes of al-Shihiri were paraded shackled and hooded into Gitmo. Now that a Democrat is President I do like how so many Democrats are in Audie Murphy mode.

Personally I applaud Obama for his persistent targeting of Islamic jihadists. It's the only thing he's managed to do right. Maybe Romney should make him Sec. Def.

@machine: Here's the thing, you admit that Obama's hands are reeking with the blood of murdered US citizens--so you claim. Why aren't you voting against him? You claim the issue is so important it's all you care about.

"This is why you can't compromise with the left. Ever. It doesn't matter to them that the side of the compromise they support is the piece that triggered the problem."

This seems to be true.

Bush gave a Democrat congress anything and everything they wanted, and we're supposed to hold him accountable but never them. And sure, he should be held accountable. But so should they.

I'm not at all interested in saying that people should not have been moved out of Gitmo. But it's a bit rich if the people who were demanding its closure and demanding that those innocent fellows be let go, now figure that Bush did something wrong. Like Andy up there saying that Bush fucked up the war on terror.

But I suppose never compromising, like Obama seems determined to never do, does save one from being blamed by the other guy for working with the other guy.

whore of the internet: while lefties are not my cup of tea, I think we need to consider what they have to say.

And for what its worth I was a career soldier and engaged in some rather unsavory things in Viet Nam. Thats the nature of war. General Sherman said that war is hell--and it is. I dont regret the things I did as long as I brought my troopers back alive.

Allie is more than capable of defending her positions--but to call her a bitch and a cunt says a hell of lot more than you than it does for Allie.

No, Allie, you did not "win" an argument with your stupid emotional one liner. I was trying to be polite in saying you are over your head, but my dear lady you are entirely out of your depth here conflating the illegal with the heroic. What is "cowardly" is failing to more bluntly point out your profound vacuity.

@Synova:Bush gave a Democrat congress anything and everything they wanted, and we're supposed to hold him accountable but never them.

They can't put their rhetoric back in the tube. They said the stuff Obama is doing now is like Nazi Germany and the Soviet Union. They need to be held accountable for that kind of talk. If they didn't mean it they need to be made to admit it or embarrassed into shutting up. If they did mean it they need to act like it.

Michael, whatever, we have had this go round for quite sometime now, you are anything but polite when you attempt to diminish the capacity of the commenter that you are arguing with, it's low and not in good faith.

while lefties are not my cup of tea, I think we need to consider what they have to say.

---lol. Why? We're bankrupt as a nation, whitey is being blamed for everything everywhere, flash mobs are targeting white people and no one talks about it, and constitution is in tatters.

Why? Because of listening, considering, and "being fair" to the left.

Allie is more than capable of defending her positions--if by "defending" you mean "lying" and "changing her logic and argument every other sentence."

but to call her a bitch and a cunt says a hell of lot more than you than it does for Allie.

---lmao. this is why we're in the shit right now: instead of realizing the left is a group of sub-human pieces of shit who aren't civil in the least bit, you instead castigate me for not treating the dogs as humans.

Get your head out of your ass. Asking me to be "civil" to them is like asking me to stay put while a rattlesnake bites me.

Whore of the internet: we are clearly not going to agree, so lets agree to move on. Please do note, however, that the ONLY policy of Mr Obama I agree with is his drone strikes on AQ leadership--and yes, they are extra judicial. I do hope he keeps it up. Note also, that Miss Allie agreed with me--she is not some squishy liberal. the girl has some steel in her backbone. YOu deployment of cunt and bitch are simply out of bounds.

we are clearly not going to agree, so lets agree to move on. ---Listen, shithead, you were the one attempting to make me sit there while a rattlesnake bit me.

Note also, that Miss Allie agreed with me--she is not some squishy liberal. ---LMAO> She ONLY agreed withyou you because she didn't want to criticize Her Dear Leader and she still wanted to blame Bush.

She is an OBVIOUS squishy liberal. She'll say whatever is necessary to defend Mein Obama and attack the right---even if it contradicts what she said a sentence before.

Wake up.

the girl has some steel in her backbone.---For defending Obama and lying at every turn, yes.

YOu deployment of cunt and bitch are simply out of bounds.

---You still have not made any argument why a leftist deserves civility after Jon Stewart, Michael Moore, Bill Maher, Stephen Colbert, Al Sharpton, Ed Schultz, Keith Olbermann, and Kos are LIONIZED by the left and never criticized by them for being "uncivil."

Explain why I have to follow civility rules with the left when they do not have to.

Marshall--From what I have seen of Miss Allie's posts, yes she is a "squishy liberal." But on on the issue of taking a war on terror to the perpetrators, she seems to be quite on board. We do not have to agree on all issues; but on the conduct of the war on terror, we do appear to occupy common ground.

Roger J. said... Marshall--From what I have seen of Miss Allie's posts, yes she is a "squishy liberal." But on on the issue of taking a war on terror to the perpetrators, she seems to be quite on board.

She's a conventional leftist, but that isn't the problem. The problem is her dishonesty. She makes whatever argument she decides best supports Obama even if it contradicts something she wrote the day before. She may really believe what she wrote, or not. There's no way to tell. But engaging in this sort of partisan hackery is not indicative of "backbone".

Fine, you're afraid of being called a racist because of what I wrote. Fair enough---its your blog and racism---especially racism against blacks---is a career-killing charge in this leftist-created world.

but its not a Moby comment. Statistically, this is very likely to happen.

Marshall--I am not informed enough to know what Miss Allie's overall political philosophy is--I know it probably leans left. I was only pointing out that she appeared to support the President's policy of targeting killings. That position I agree with; I am not required, however, to agree with her other positions.

Whore: hate to disabuse you of your opinions, but I do not own a TV and do not watch any of the idiots who cater to their audience.

My only point was this: I agree with Mr Obama's policy of drone strikes, extrajudicial as they might be. I hope he keeps them up, and if collateral damage (wives, children etc) die in the process, bad luck for them. Now I read Allie's comment as agreeing with me.

hate to disabuse you of your opinions, but I do not own a TV and do not watch any of the idiots who cater to their audience.

--You linked to the site, so clearly you've seen his show somewhere. But you never hold the left accountable for lionizing him, yet you criticize me for doing it right back.

Get your priorities straight.

Now I read Allie's comment as agreeing with me.

---Given every other "defend My Dear Leader at all costs" comment by her, isn't it just a little suspicious to you that she's agreeing with Obama again, despite ripping Bush's policy, which was more benign?

This what Allieoop thinks: She thinks locking them up and interrogating them is torture and a violation of their rights, but murdering them without trial is ok.

Contradiction much?

I think murdering them without trial is fine at this point. Due process and the Constitution are a joke. But Ally's defense is so contradictory, it can only be from the diseased mind of an Obama follower.

Miss Allie--as you have more than demonstrated, folks that come from different sides of the debate may agree--Now I think clearly both you and are in agreement on THIS issue. doesnt mean that there are other issues that we can disagree on. What I really object to, as I noted in my previous posts, are the egregious sexual allusions. But some people, apparently, feel the need to call people cunts and bitches. That does nothing except to reflect on their bad upbringing.

Yes Roger, I do agree with you, but I'm sure Marshal and Whore will continue their war on liberals, take no prisoners!!

---Being a lying lefty hypocrite like yourself, you're incapable of seeing the irony in your last sentence, for several reasons.

What would those two guys do if we were attacked again and need to be Americans first?

--Maybe I'd act the way the left did after 9/11: accuse Obama of being a war criminal, try to have him arrest, riot, bomb buildings, physically attack right-wing voters, and bankrupt the government.

or maybe the way you did during the cold war: be traitors to the US, give aid and comfort to the commies, spy for commie countries, kill US troops, murder children, attack American history, cover up communist gulags, and, when all else failed, encourage "peace and coexistence" and claim anyone who desired to fight for freedom was an animal.

nah. I'd just offer your ass up as a prisoner to Al Queda and then, when they take you back to their 3rd-world shithole (ahem, "Diverse homeland"), nuke you and them to smithereens.

Who would the enemy be?---The left is always the enemy, whatever form it takes.

What the hell would ever convince you that AllieOop is a hypocritical partisan hack?

Think about it: what would Allie have to say or do to prove my point: that she only agrees with your argument as long as Obama supports it; that if he changed his mind overnight, her opinion would change to.

Whore: try to wrap your mind around this factoid: Allie and I (and garage as well) are friends on this blog. we do not agree on all political positions. but we are friends who feel free to disagree. When you paint every one who doesnt disagree with you as mortal enemies, you are truly fucked.

Whore, I wasn't going to respond to your nonsense at all, but seriously, I spied for the Communists when I was s a mere child?

----LMAO. You smear the right as being the same, but suddenly now you're divorced from your commie past?

Please, bitch, we can see your photo. You're old. Old enough to have been around int he 1980s. You DO know the USSR and CUBA and most of your precious, precious commie nations had children REPORT and SPY on their parents, right, stupid? Hell, the Soviets made some kid a national hero for doing it so well!

Garage and I have exchanged memphis ribs for Wisconsin cheese and brats; we love fishing, although I think he is dead wrong when he claims northerns are better eating than walleyes. And I care about his daughter who has some major medical issues--these things do not emerge in flame wars on the internet and garage has not shared those with other than his friends. As for Allie? a classy lady whose political opinions I dont agree with but I do respect her opinions.

So Mr Whore: if you choose to paint people as black or white as your political philosphy dictates, so be it. It is, IMO, a caricature that does stand up. But you are welcome to it. I dont chose to participate.

"What the hell would ever convince you that AllieOop is a hypocritical partisan hack?"

Certainly not you. Not even in the sense of it takes one to know one.

Because you're disrespecting everyone with the assumption that they're just too stupid to disagree with someone, or see the faults in their arguments, without being told in nasty terms by a helpful person like yourself.

Are we supposed to say, thank you for treating everyone like brain dead idiots? Why THANK YOU because I'm too stupid to figure it out on my own?

Honestly. You must be a lonely soul bereft of your soul mates who get to hate conservative racists who want to rape women and make them have babies. Feel left out?

People on the left who act like that, like you, and they DO, are not winning. Don't make excuses. Take a deep breath and go out and plant daffodils or something.

Whore, the cold war started in 1947, I was born in 1952, I was a child during the height of the cold war. In 1980 I was busy having children, later still I was busy working as nurse and raising my four kids after their father passed away.

I was never nor am I now a member of the Communist Party, Whore McCarthy.

AllieOop said... Yes Roger, I do agree with you, but I'm sure Marshal and Whore will continue their war on liberals, take no prisoners!!

What would those two guys do if we were attacked again and need to be Americans first?

And this just after you whined Michael...you are anything but polite when you attempt to diminish the capacity of the commenter that you are arguing with, it's low and not in good faith.

Are you having trouble keeping your voices straight again? That faux respect for good faith disappeared as soon as something else worked better. I wonder why you keep doing that? It's almost like the principles you claim aren't actually principles you hold, you're just picking whatever you think works at that particular moment in time. You should work on that.

Colonel Angus--that was Garage's position upon which I diagree entirely--Now I have been known to eat Northerns in Saskatchewan when we couldnt catch walleye--but that was out of despiration and the need for a shore dinner.

Garage and I have exchanged memphis ribs for Wisconsin cheese and brats; we love fishing, although I think he is dead wrong when he claims northerns are better eating than walleyes.---Heartwarming. Its like Jimmy Stewart and Henry Fonda. Except without the traitor-to-her-country daughter.

And I care about his daughter who has some major medical issues-----He deserves it. Actually, he deserves a lot worse.

these things do not emerge in flame wars on the internet and garage has not shared those with other than his friends. ---No, he just acts like an uncivil asshole and YOU NEVER CALL HIM ON IT.

Hypocrite.

As for Allie? a classy lady whose political opinions I dont agree with but I do respect her opinions.---You still have not answered my question about her beliefs.

It is, IMO, a caricature that does stand up. But you are welcome to it. I dont chose to participate.

---No, you just castigate your own side while letting these pieces of trash act however they want.

Certainly not you. Not even in the sense of it takes one to know one.---Please. Fuck Bush's bailout. Fuck any R who voted Tim Geithner in. FUCK JOHN ROBERTS.

Partisan is not me, baby. I stick to my political principles.

Because you're disrespecting everyone with the assumption that they're just too stupid to disagree with someone, or see the faults in their arguments, without being told in nasty terms by a helpful person like yourself.---The left deserves NO RESPECT for what they've done since Bush took office in 2000.

Are we supposed to say, thank you for treating everyone like brain dead idiots? Why THANK YOU because I'm too stupid to figure it out on my own?

--Someone must bring you the light, dear child.

Honestly. You must be a lonely soul bereft of your soul mates who get to hate conservative racists who want to rape women and make them have babies. Feel left out?---Ah, another woman who loves to murder children. Such a great soul.

People on the left who act like that, like you, and they DO, are not winning. ---LMAO. YES THEY ARE. They run the party which controls the white house and senate and supreme court. They own the airwaves. They are bankrupting the country.

Lying about reality doesn't work.

Don't make excuses. Take a deep breath and go out and plant daffodils or something. ---"Ignore the destruction of your country! Be civil to the Nazis! Its ok, Obama will save us all!"

Child.

You're the kind of piece of shit who would've told the men in 1775 to stop arming themselves and lay down for their overlords.

Whore, the cold war started in 1947, I was born in 1952, I was a child during the height of the cold war. In 1980 I was busy having children, later still I was busy working as nurse and raising my four kids after their father passed away.

---The Cambridge Five had careers and lives too---whilst betraying the West for the Soviets.

I was never nor am I now a member of the Communist Party, Whore McCarthy.

---Maybe (we can never tell---leftists lie for any reason), but your movement certainly is in bed with them and has no trouble betraying America for it. Your philosophy is one of oppression, murder, and destruction.

Synova is one of the most intelligent and principled commenters and women on Althouse, I'm sure we don't agree on politics and most social issues, but I respect her tremendously. Whore you would have to look up to touch the hem of her garment.

Synova is one of the most intelligent and principled commenters and women on Althouse, I'm sure we don't agree on politics and most social issues, but I respect her tremendously. Whore you would have to look up to touch the hem of her garment.

The 11:04? It didn't address anything you wrote. I'm merely pointing out Allie's hypocrisy. She criticized Michael for "attempt[ing] to diminish the capacity of the commenter that you are arguing with, it's low".

Then she followed this up with: What would those two guys do if we were attacked again and need to be Americans first? Who would the enemy be?

So according to Allie it's inappropriate to diminish a commenter's capacity, which presumably translates to arguing personally rather than on the subject of the disagreement. But when convenient she has no problems insulting those she dislikes. So it seems she doesn't have a problem arguing personally except when she's the target.

One probably with your snarky equation: we have no evidence that most of those released from Gitmo have subsequently engaged in any terrorist acts or hostilities toward America, and even the military admitted those most of those initially imprisoned there had no business being there, given the utter absence of any evidence they had engaged in terrorism or acts of hostility against America before they were kidnapped and dumped into Gitmo.